The Triumphs and Travails of the Jeffersonian Republic

Dawn of the Age of Jefferson

At the end of the Presidency of John Adams, the Federalist Party fell out of favor with the American public due to the Alien and Sedition Acts and other controversial policies. This led to Thomas Jefferson winning the Election of 1800 and ushering in a new era of American politics. While the world watched, the United States peacefully transferred power from the Federalists to the Democratic-Republican Party in what some called the “Revolution of 1800.”

Despite the transfer of power to the Democratic-Republicans, the Supreme Court remained in control of Federalis-appointed judges, including Chief Justice John Marshall. After the Judiciary Act of 1801 overturned the appointment of “Midnight Judges” by John Adams, the Supreme Court, led by Marshall, issued a landmark ruling in Marbury v. Madison (1803) that established the concept of Judicial Review. Marshall went on to make several rulings that clarified the powers of the courts and the government, which are generally viewed as expanding the powers of the Federal Government.

Like his predecessors, Jefferson encountered issues with France and Great Britain. Jefferson sought to avoid war with both nations but took advantage of the opportunity to buy the Louisiana Territory in 1803, doubling the size of the United States. However, as war engulfed Europe, the United States was caught in the middle of a trade war that affected American merchants and ships. Jefferson avoided war but supported economic sanctions against France and Great Britain that hurt the American economy.

Jefferson also dealt with the Barbary Pirates, a conflict the United States won due to victory at the Battle of Derna in 1805. This First Barbary War did not settle the issue of piracy in the Mediterranean. By 1807, pirates had resumed activities against American vessels.

Overall, Jefferson’s eight years in office were a success, paving the way for the Democratic-Republicans to retain control of the Presidency. James Madison succeeded Jefferson at a time when the conflict between France and Great Britain was intensifying. 

Britain continued to increase tension with the United States over several issues, including the impressment of American sailors. However, Madison faced a serious issue on the Western Frontier when Shawnee Chief Tecumseh started to organize Indian nations to resist America’s Westward Expansion. American believed the British were working with Tecumseh.

Madison authorized William Henry Harrison, the Governor of the Indiana Territory, to take military action against Tecumseh. Harrison marched to engage the Indians, who attacked him near the confluence of the Wabash and Tippecanoe Rivers. The Americans won the battle and destroyed Tecumseh’s base of operations at Prophetstown. Tecumseh was not at Prophetstown during the Battle of Tippecanoe, so his dreams of forming a confederation of Indian nations continued.

As a new generation of politicians entered Congress, the call for war with Britain intensified. The so-called War Hawks, including Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun, pushed for war. Many of them believed the United States would be able to conquer Canada. Despite opposition from the New England States and Federalists, Madison asked for — and was granted — a Declaration of War on June 18, 1812, starting the War of 1812.

The Election of 1800 – Federalists vs. Democratic-Republicans

• The Election of 1800 was the first election between Federalists and Democratic-Republicans.
• John Adams was the Federalist candidate.
• Thomas Jefferson was the Democratic-Republican candidate.
• Federalists supported a strong central government and public order.
• Democratic-Republicans advocated for agrarian purity, liberty, and States’ Rights.
• The 12 years from 1800 to 1812 revealed the challenges of governing the Republic, even for those who had previously criticized the Federalist Party.

Federalists and Republicans

Federalist Struggles During the Adams Presidency

• The Federalists faced significant challenges during the Presidency of John Adams.
• The Alien and Sedition Acts created many enemies for the Federalists.
• Most critics of the Acts were loyal to the Democratic-Republicans.
• The Hamiltonian wing of the Federalist Party split with President Adams, and was known as the “High Federalists.”.
• Alexander Hamilton criticized Adams in a privately printed pamphlet.
• Democratic-Republicans obtained a copy and published it.

Federalist Setbacks Over Buildup for War with France

• Adams’s refusal to engage in a war with France harmed the Federalists.
• War preparations increased public debt and led to new taxes, including a stamp tax.
• The threat of war ended, leaving the country feeling the preparations were unnecessary.
• Military preparations were seen as extravagant.
• Seamen for the new United States Navy were derogatorily called “John Adams’s Jackasses.”
• Adams was ironically known as “the Father of the American Navy.”

Federalist Attacks on Jefferson

• The Federalists launched one of America’s earliest “whispering campaigns” against Thomas Jefferson.
• Jefferson was accused of robbing a widow and her children and having children with some of his female slaves.
• Jefferson’s relationship with Sally Hemmings was confirmed through DNA testing.
• Jefferson faced criticism from orthodox clergy due to his efforts to separate church and state in Virginia.
• Despite believing in God, Jefferson was accused of atheism by preachers in New England.
• Some Federalist families feared Jefferson’s election and even buried or hung their Bibles.

The Jeffersonian “Revolution of 1800”

Jefferson’s Victory in the Election of 1800

• Jefferson defeated Adams in the Electoral College, 73 to 65.
• Adams gained more electoral votes in defeat than he had four years earlier, except in New York.
• New York’s support for Jefferson, largely due to Aaron Burr’s efforts, decided the election.
• Jefferson received most of his support from the South and West.
• His success was notable in states with universal white manhood suffrage.

Jefferson-Burr Tie and the House of Representatives

• Jefferson and Aaron Burr received an equal number of Electoral Votes for the Presidency.
• The tie was to be resolved by the House of Representatives, as per Article II of the Constitution.
• The House was controlled by “lame-duck” Federalists, who preferred Burr over Jefferson.
• Voting in the House was slow, with some representatives falling asleep during the proceedings.
• The deadlock was resolved when a few Federalists, hoping for moderation from Jefferson, abstained from voting.
• This led to Thomas Jefferson being elected as the 3rd President of the United States.

AHC Note — A “lame duck” is a politician whose time in office is ending due to recent elections.

Twelfth Amendment

• The 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804, eliminated the possibility of ties by changing the election process.
• Before the 12th Amendment, each elector cast two votes, with the second-place finisher becoming Vice President.

The Decline of the Federalist Party

• John Adams was the last Federalist to be President of the United States.
• The Federalist Party gradually declined and eventually disappeared during the Age of Andrew Jackson.

The Revolution of 1800

• Jefferson described the election of 1800 as a “revolution” comparable to 1776.
• The election was not a major popular upheaval or drastic change in the political system.
• Jefferson won narrowly; a shift of about 250 votes in New York could have given the victory to Adams.
• Jefferson saw his election as a return to the original spirit of the American Revolution.
• He believed Hamilton and Adams had betrayed the ideals of 1776 and 1787.
• Jefferson’s goal was to restore the republican experiment, limit government power, and address the perceived decline in virtue that took place during the Federalist Era.

The Peaceful Transfer of Power in 1800

• The peaceful and orderly transfer of power following the 1800 election was considered revolutionary.
• All parties accepted the election results, marking a significant achievement for the young nation.
• This peaceful transition was notable given the partisan bitterness that existed during the Adams presidency.
• Comparable peaceful successions did not occur in Britain for another generation.
• Americans could take pride in the strength of their democratic experiment after a decade of division and uncertainty.

Responsibility Breeds Moderation

Jefferson’s Inauguration and Appearance

• Thomas Jefferson, nicknamed “Long Tom,” was inaugurated on March 4, 1801.
• The inauguration took place in Washington, the new capital.
• Jefferson was tall (6 feet 2.5 inches), with large hands and feet, red hair, and prominent cheekbones and chin.
• He was known as “the Red Fox” due to his hair color.
• To align with his democratic ideals, Jefferson rejected the traditional pomp and walked to the Capitol from his boardinghouse instead of using a horse-drawn coach.

Jefferson’s Inaugural Address

• Jefferson’s inaugural address was a statement of democratic principles.
• He declared that “the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail.”
• He emphasized that this majority will must be “reasonable” and that the rights of the minority must be protected by equal law.
• Jefferson aimed to reassure Federalists by stating, “We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists.”
• On foreign affairs, he pledged “honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.”

Washington’s Simplicity and Jefferson’s Etiquette Changes

• Washington D.C.’s rustic setting matched the simplicity and frugality of Jeffersonian Republicans.
• This contrasted with the elegant atmosphere of Federalist Philadelphia, the previous capital.
• Jefferson extended democratic principles to etiquette by implementing “pell-mell” seating at official dinners, with no regard for rank.
• The British Minister, accustomed to precedence under pro-British Federalists, felt insulted by this new practice.

Jefferson’s Unconventional Presidential Practices

• Jefferson often received visitors in casual attire.
• He established the precedent of sending messages to Congress to be read by a clerk, a practice that continued until the Presidency of Woodrow Wilson 112 years later.
• Jefferson avoided personal appearances for delivering messages because he felt it resembled a monarchical speech from the throne.
• He was also aware of his weak voice and unimpressive presence on a platform.

Jefferson’s Dilemma — Theory vs. Practice

• Thomas Jefferson found himself forced to reverse many of his previously championed political principles.
• There were two sides to Jefferson:
  • The scholarly private citizen focused on philosophical theories.
  • The public official who discovered the practical challenges of applying these theories in politics.
• Jefferson’s open-minded nature led to notable inconsistencies.
• It is easy to use one aspect of Jefferson’s views to refute another.

Jefferson’s View on Toleration in His Inaugural Address

• Jefferson’s tolerance was evident in his inaugural address.
• He said, “If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.”

Jefferson’s Moderate Approach After the 1800 Election

• The victory of Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans over the Federalists was the first major party shift in American history.
• There was concern that the new administration would take all the spoils of office for itself.
• Contrary to expectations, Jefferson demonstrated moderation by not dismissing many public servants for political reasons.
• Despite this, Jefferson’s supporters were frustrated as Federalist appointees remained in office, leading to complaints that “few die, none resign.”

Jefferson’s Political Skills and Party Weakness

• Jefferson proved to be an effective politician, particularly in informal settings like dinner parties.
• He engaged congressional representatives personally, serving imported wines and dishes prepared by his French cook.
• Jefferson relied on personal charm due to the weak organization of his party.
• The Democratic-Republicans lacked the power to offer patronage, which hindered their ability to build a loyal following.
• The main unifying factor for the Democratic-Republicans was their opposition to the Federalists.
• As Federalist influence waned, so did the unity of the Democratic-Republicans.
• The era of well-developed, well-disciplined political parties was still to come.

AHC Note — Patronage — also known as the Spoils System — was prevalent in 19th Century politics and was a process where political party bosses rewarded loyal supporters with government jobs, positions, and contracts. This often led to political instability and several well-known incidents of corruption. Over time, Progressives sought to reform and reduce the Spoils System, which contributed to the development of professional government employees and expanded government bureaucracies. The Spoils System is most closely associated with Andrew Jackson and Ulysses S. Grant.

Jeffersonian Restraint

Jefferson’s Reforms and Legislation

• Jefferson aimed to reverse Federalist abuses caused by anti-French hysteria.
• The Alien and Sedition Acts had expired by the time he took office.
• Jefferson quickly pardoned individuals convicted under the Sedition Act and remitted many fines.
• The Jeffersonians enacted the Naturalization Law of 1802, reducing the residency requirement from 14 years to 5 years.

Jefferson’s Repeal of the Excise Tax

• Jefferson removed a significant element of the Hamilton Financial System by targeting the excise tax.
• He opposed the excise tax due to its burden on farmers and its association with bureaucratic growth.
• Jefferson successfully persuaded Congress to repeal the excise tax.
• The repeal resulted in a loss of approximately one million dollars annually in needed federal revenue.

Albert Gallatin’s Role as Secretary of the Treasury

• Albert Gallatin, a Swiss-born and French-accented official, was known as the “Watchdog of the Treasury.”
• He was as skilled as Hamilton in his role as Secretary of the Treasury.
• Gallatin shared Jefferson’s view that a national debt was detrimental rather than beneficial.
• Gallatin significantly reduced the national debt while balancing the budget.

Jeffersonians and the Hamiltonian Framework

• Except for repealing the excise tax, Jeffersonians largely maintained the Hamilton Financial System.
• They did not alter Federalist programs for funding the national debt at par or assuming the Revolutionary War debts of the states.
• The Bank of the United States continued to operate.
• The mildly protective Federalist tariff remained in place.
• Over time, Jeffersonians adopted Federalist practices by rechartering a larger bank and increasing the protective tariff.

Jefferson’s Moderation and the Two-Party System

• Jefferson’s moderation strengthened the outcomes of the “Revolution of 1800.”
• By incorporating key Federalist programs, Jefferson demonstrated that a regime change need not be catastrophic for the outgoing party.
• His approach helped pave the way for the development of a two-party system, which became a defining feature of American politics.

The “Dead Clutch” of the Judiciary

The Judiciary Act of 1801 and the Midnight Judges

• The Judiciary Act of 1801 was one of the last significant laws enacted by the outgoing Federalist Congress.
• It established 16 new federal judgeships and other judicial positions.
• President Adams stayed at his desk until late on his final day in office, purportedly signing commissions for Federalist “midnight judges.”
• In reality, only three commissions were signed on his last day.

AHC Note — The Judiciary Act of 1801 was signed into law by President John Adams on February 13, 1801. It expanded the Federal Court system, allowing him to appoint political allies to new positions. The appointments are known as the “Midnight Judges” and were quickly repealed by Thomas Jefferson.

Controversy Surrounding the Judiciary Act of 1801

• The Judiciary Act of 1801 created significant resentment.
• Democratic-Republicans saw it as an attempt by the Federalists to entrench their influence by filling lifetime judicial positions with their partisans.
• Democratic-Republicans condemned the last-minute appointments as a blatant defiance of the people’s will, which had been clearly expressed in the recent elections.

Repeal of the Judiciary Act and the Role of Chief Justice Marshall

• The newly elected Democratic-Republican Congress repealed the Judiciary Act of 1801 the year after its passage.
• Jeffersonians targeted Chief Justice John Marshall, appointed by Adams as a last-minute choice.
• Marshall, a cousin of Thomas Jefferson, was known for his strong will, raspy voice, and sharp intellect.
• Despite only 6 weeks of formal legal training, Marshall significantly influenced American legal tradition through his powerful intellect and commanding presence.

John Marshall’s Career and Legacy

• John Marshall had served at Valley Forge during the Revolutionary War and was deeply affected by the weaknesses of the Confederation Congress.
• This experience led him to become a staunch Federalist, focused on strengthening federal government power.
• Despite condemnation from States’ Rights Jeffersonians, Marshall continued to advance his Federalist principles.
• He served for approximately 30 days under a Federalist administration and for 34 years under Jefferson and subsequent Presidents.
• While the Federalist Party faded, Marshall remained influential, issuing decisions for many years that strengthened and clarified the Federal Government.

AHC Note — John Marshall was arguably the greatest Chief Justice in the history of the United States Supreme Court. He was a Founding Father, an officer in the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, a congressional representative from Virginia, Secretary of State, and 4th Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Marbury v. Madison

• One of the “midnight judges” of 1801, William Marbury, was appointed by President Adams as a justice of the peace for the District of Columbia.
• Marbury’s commission was not delivered by the new Secretary of State, James Madison, prompting Marbury to sue for its delivery.
• Chief Justice Marshall, anticipating President Jefferson would not enforce a writ for Marbury, dismissed the suit to avoid a direct political confrontation.

The Establishment of Judicial Review

• Marshall used the opportunity to make a significant legal point: he declared that a portion of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which Marbury used for his appeal, was unconstitutional.
• Marshall ruled that the act had granted the Supreme Court powers that the Constitution did not intend.
• In his opinion on Marbury v. Madison (1803), Marshall enhanced the authority of the Supreme Court while challenging the Democratic-Republicans.
• Prior to this case, there was debate over who had the ultimate authority to interpret the Constitution.
• Jefferson, in the Kentucky Resolutions (1798), argued that individual States held this power.
• Marshall established the principle of “judicial review,” asserting that only the Supreme Court had the final say on constitutional matters.
• This landmark decision placed the keystone in the structure supporting the Supreme Court’s significant role in American governance.

AHC Note — Marbury v. Madison (1803) was a landmark court case that resulted in the United States Supreme Court establishing the principle of Judicial Review, giving the Court the power to review and strike down laws passed by Congress or the states if they are deemed unconstitutional. 

Impeachment of Samuel Chase and the Independence of the Judiciary

• Marshall’s decision in Marbury v. Madison led Democratic-Republicans to seek retaliation.
• Jefferson pushed for the impeachment of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, who was known for his arrogance and outspoken nature.
• In early 1804, the House of Representatives voted to impeach Chase, with the case moving to the Senate for trial.
• The charges were based on “high crimes and misdemeanors,” as defined by the Constitution, but evidence showed Chase’s issues were primarily related to partisanship and outspoken behavior, not serious criminal conduct.
• The Senate did not achieve the necessary votes to convict and remove Chase.
• This outcome established an important precedent, ensuring that the impeachment process would not be used to target the Supreme Court for political reasons.
• Jefferson’s attempt at “judge breaking” highlighted the importance of judicial independence and the separation of powers among the three branches of government.

AHC Note — Samuel Chase is a Founding Father who was a delegate from Maryland to the First Continental Congress and signed the Articles of Association, which set up the Continental Association. He was also elected to the Second Continental Congress, signed the Olive Branch Petition, and signed the Declaration of Independence. Chase is also the only Supreme Court Justice impeached by the House of Representatives.

Jefferson, A Reluctant Warrior

Jefferson’s Reduction of the Military and Its Motivations

• Jefferson’s first action as president was to significantly reduce the military to a small police force of 2,500 officers and men.
• Critics labeled this reduction as penny-pinching, but Jefferson’s motives were tied to republican ideals rather than cost.
• Jefferson hoped America could avoid the wars and alliances of Europe, setting an example by eschewing military force and gaining allies through “peaceful coercion.”
• Democratic-Republicans were wary of large Standing Armies, viewing them as potential threats to liberty and invitations to dictatorship.
• Navies were considered less dangerous as they could not invade land and threaten domestic freedoms.
• Jeffersonians were skeptical of building a large navy, fearing it might lead to involvement in expensive and corrupting foreign conflicts.

The Barbary Pirates

• The North African Barbary Pirates had a long history of extorting and plundering merchant ships in the Mediterranean.
• Previous Federalist administrations had been compelled to pay for protection against these pirates.
• During the XYZ Affair, despite the public’s rallying cry of “Millions for defense but not one cent for tribute,” the U.S. was still paying bribes, with 26 barrels full of money sent to Algiers.

The Barbary Wars

• Jefferson’s vision did not include war or paying tribute to the Barbary States, but the situation changed in 1801.
• The Pasha of Tripoli, unhappy with the money being paid, declared war on the United States by cutting down the American consulate’s flagstaff.
• This confrontation tested Jefferson, who was averse to military conflict, a pacifist, and critical of a large navy.
• Jefferson responded by sending the small U.S. Navy to Tripoli.
• After four years of intermittent fighting and notable actions, Jefferson secured a treaty of peace from Tripoli in 1805.
• The treaty was achieved at the cost of $60,000, used as ransom for captured American sailors.

Jefferson’s Mosquito Fleet

• Jefferson was intrigued by small gunboats, which had been somewhat successful in the Tripolitan War.
• Committed to reducing taxes, he supported a large fleet of small coastal craft, known as “Jeffs” or the “Mosquito Fleet.”
• He believed these small vessels would be effective in protecting American shores without provoking international conflicts on the high seas.
• Around 200 small gunboats were built in local shipyards, with voting support for Jefferson.
• These boats, often equipped with only one cumbersome gun, sometimes posed a greater threat to their crews than to enemies.
• During a hurricane and tidal wave in Savannah, Georgia, one gunboat was found 8 miles inland in a cornfield, leading Federalists to mockingly toast the boats as the best on land.

The Louisiana Godsend

The 1800 Secret Pact and the Transfer of Louisiana

• In 1800, a secret agreement was signed that had significant implications for the United States.
• Napoleon Bonaparte persuaded the King of Spain to transfer the vast Louisiana territory, including New Orleans, to France for favorable terms.

AHC Note — In 1800, France negotiated the Treaty of San Ildefonso, which returned Louisiana to France. The following year, in 1801, President Jefferson learned France had regained control of the territory.

Impact of the 1802 Withdrawal of the Right of Deposit

• In 1802, Spain at New Orleans revoked the right of deposit granted to America by the 1795 treaty.
• This right was crucial for frontier farmers who used the Mississippi River to transport their goods to ocean-going vessels.
• The withdrawal sparked widespread anger among Americans, with some pioneers threatening to seize New Orleans by force.
• Such an action could have led to a potential conflict with both Spain and France.

AHC Note — When the French took control in 1802, Spain announced it would not allow Americans to access warehouses in New Orleans. Jefferson wanted to resolve the situation diplomatically. However, some of his political opponents in the Federalist Party suggested more extreme measures, including going to war with France to regain access to New Orleans.

Jefferson’s Dilemma with Louisiana and Napoleon

• The transfer of Louisiana from Spain to France presented a significant threat to the United States, given Napoleon’s military prowess and imperial ambition.
• While Spain’s control over Louisiana posed no immediate danger, French control under Napoleon suggested potential conflict.
• The U.S. might need to fight to expel Napoleon and would likely require allies, conflicting with Jefferson’s anti-alliance stance.

Jefferson’s Diplomatic Maneuvers for Louisiana

• In early 1803, Jefferson sent James Monroe to Paris to negotiate the purchase of New Orleans and additional land for up to $10 million.
• If the purchase failed and the situation became critical, negotiations for an alliance with Britain were to be pursued.
• Jefferson’s proposal to ally with Britain against France, despite his aversion to war and entangling alliances, highlighted his dilemma over securing New Orleans.

AHC Note — Jefferson started to make military preparations in the event there was a conflict with France in the Mississippi River Valley. However, he also made diplomatic overtures to France and sent James Monroe to help Robert R. Livingston negotiate with the French government. Jefferson authorized them to offer to buy West Florida and New Orleans for as much as $10 million.

By the time Monroe arrived in Paris on April 12, 1803, the French had made a stunning offer to Livingston. For various reasons, Napoleon had decided to abandon his plans for Louisiana and he had Prime Minister Charles Talleyrand offer not just New Orleans — but the entire territory — to the United States for $15 million. Monroe and Livingston agreed to the purchase and they signed the Lousiana Purchase Treaty with France on April 30, 1803.

Napoleon’s Decision to Sell Louisiana

Napoleon’s had three main reasons for selling Louisiana:

• Failure in Santo Domingo:
  • Napoleon’s efforts to reclaim Santo Domingo, a valuable sugar-producing colony, failed due to fierce resistance from ex-slaves led by Toussaint L’Ouverture and the devastating impact of yellow fever on French troops.
  • The failure reduced the need for Louisiana’s food supplies.
• Imminent Conflict with Britain:
  • Napoleon was preparing to resume hostilities with Britain and feared that Britain might seize Louisiana if he tried to hold onto it.
  • To avoid pushing the U.S. into an alliance with Britain and to fund his European plans, Napoleon chose to sell Louisiana to the Americans.
• Strategic Considerations:
  • Napoleon hoped that a stronger United States, bolstered by the acquisition of Louisiana, could counterbalance British power in the New World.
  • The circumstances in Europe inadvertently facilitated America’s diplomatic success in acquiring the territory.

The Louisiana Purchase Negotiations and Treaty

• American minister Robert R. Livingston was unexpectedly offered all of Louisiana.
• Livingston, partially deaf and surprised by the proposal, engaged in hurried negotiations.
• Negotiations lasted about a week, and the agreement was signed on April 30, 1803.
• The United States acquired Louisiana for approximately $15 million, $5 million more than Jefferson had approved.
• The purchase doubled the size of the United States and secured control over the Mississippi River and New Orleans.

Jefferson’s Dilemma Over Constitutional Authority

• Jefferson faced a conflict between his theoretical beliefs and practical responsibilities.
• He questioned where the Constitution authorized the president to negotiate treaties for large territories.
• The Constitution did not explicitly permit the incorporation of new lands with many inhabitants.
• Jefferson considered proposing a Constitutional Amendment to justify the purchase.
• He feared Napoleon might retract the offer if delays occurred.
• Despite believing the purchase was unconstitutional, Jefferson submitted the treaty to the Senate.

Senate Approval of the Louisiana Purchase

• Senators quickly approved the transaction.
• Public support was enthusiastic.
• The purchase was for 828,000 square miles at approximately 3 cents per acre.
• Americans were eager to acquire the land despite constitutional concerns.

AHC Note — Although the desire Americans had to move west dated to the Colonial Era, the Louisiana Purchase significantly increased the potential for Westward Expansion. It also contributed to the growth of the Western Fur Trade and the development of Henry Clay’s American System.

Louisiana in the Long View

Impact of the Louisiana Purchase

• Jefferson avoided a conflict with France and a possible alliance with England.
• The purchase secured the western half of the richest river valley in the world.
• The acquisition supported the ideal of a great agrarian republic.
• The transfer established a precedent for acquiring foreign territory by purchase.

Lewis and Clark Expedition

• Jefferson sent Meriwether Lewis and William Clark to explore the northern part of the Louisiana Purchase.
• The Lewis and Clark Expedition started in the spring of 1804.
• Lewis and Clark were aided by Sacajawea, a Shoshoni woman, who served as a guide.
• They traveled up the Missouri River, through the Rockies, and down the Columbia River to the Pacific coast.

Results of Lewis and Clark’s Expedition

• The expedition lasted two and a half years.
• They provided scientific observations, maps, and knowledge of regional Indian tribes.
• They documented immense herds of buffalo, elk, deer, and antelope on the Great Plains.
• Lewis encountered danger when a group of Blackfoot Indians stole horses from a small detachment.
• Lewis pursued the thieves, was shot at, and later killed a Blackfoot warrior.
• The expedition returned to their main party on the Missouri River.

Impact of Lewis and Clark’s Expedition and Subsequent Exploration

• The expedition demonstrated the possibility of an overland trail to the Pacific.
• It paved the way for the future migration of missionaries, fur-traders, and settlers to the Oregon Country.
• Zebulon Pike explored the headwaters of the Mississippi River in 1805–1806.
• Pike also explored the southern Louisiana territory and sighted the peak later named after him.

AHC Note — Merriwether Lewis, William Clark, and Zebulon Pike explored the Louisiana Purchase. In 1804, the Lewis and Clark Expedition set out to explore the land west of the Mississippi River. In 1805, Zebulon Pike led an expedition to find the headwaters of the Mississippi. Both expeditions helped map the new territory and aided westward expansion. Pike led a second expedition in 1806 that traveled to the Rocky Mountains and then southwest. 

Long-Term of the Louisiana Purchase

• Greatly expanded the fortunes of the United States.
• Increased the power of the federal government.

Short-Term Effects of the Louisiana Purchase

• Raised fears of secession and foreign intrigue due to the vast territory and the government’s limited ability to control it.

The Aaron Burr Conspiracies

Aaron Burr’s Duel with Alexander Hamilton

• Aaron Burr, Jefferson’s first Vice President, was dropped from the cabinet for Jefferson’s second term.
• Burr aligned with Federalists plotting the secession of New England and New York.
• Alexander Hamilton exposed the conspiracy.
• Burr, angered by Hamilton’s actions, challenged him to a duel.
• Burr killed Hamilton with his shot, eliminating the Federalist Party’s last effective leader.

AHC Note — The conflict between Hamilton and Burr was far more complex than a disagreement over a Federalist plan for secession. The two were embroiled in a long-running feud over various issues. What triggered the duel were comments Hamilton allegedly made about Burr during a dinner party. Burr was still Vice President when the duel took place. He was eventually accused of murder but the charges were dropped.

Burr’s Western Schemes and Betrayal

• After his political career ended, Burr turned to plotting in the Trans-Mississippi West.
• He allied with General James Wilkinson, military governor of Louisiana Territory — and a Spanish agent.
• Burr and Wilkinson’s plans were to separate the western U.S. from the East and expand into Spanish-controlled Mexico and Florida.
• In the fall of 1806, Burr and 60 followers floated down the Mississippi River to meet Wilkinson’s army at Natchez.
• Wilkinson, learning that Jefferson knew of the plot, betrayed Burr and fled to New Orleans.

Burr’s Treason Trial and Aftermath

• Burr was arrested and tried for treason.
• Chief Justice John Marshall insisted that a guilty verdict required proof of overt acts of treason, not just intentions.
• Burr was acquitted and fled to Europe.
• In Europe, Burr urged Napoleon to make peace with Britain and plan a joint invasion of America.
• Burr’s actions highlighted the challenges of governing newly acquired western territories.

AHC Note — Burr’s Secession Scheme is still controversial, and historians do not agree about what his intentions were. There have even been theories presented that Wilkson was actually working as a double agent with President Jefferson on a scheme to spy on the Spanish in the southwest. Although that is also unproven, some historians point to the expedition led by Zebulon Pike as evidence. Wilkinson sent Pike to explore the Southwest and Pike and some of his men drifted into Spanish territory and were arrested. While Pike was held prisoner in the Chihuahua Province, he gathered intelligence. He studied maps and learned Mexico was unhappy with Spanish rule. This information may have been used by Burr or by the United States to seed dissension among Mexicans against the Spanish.

America: A Nutcrackered Neutral

Jefferson’s Reelection and the European Conflict

• Jefferson was reelected in the Presidential Election of 1804 with 162 electoral votes against 14 for his Federalist opponent, Charles C. Pinckney.
• Jefferson’s second administration was overshadowed by new challenges from overseas.

Impact of Major European Battles on American Shipping

• Napoleon renewed his war with Britain in 1803, initiating the Napoleonic Wars.
• In 1805, Britain’s naval supremacy was solidified by Admiral Horatio Nelson’s victory at the Battle of Trafalgar.
• Napoleon’s dominance on land was confirmed by his victory at the Battle of Austerlitz.
• France and Britain emerged as dominant powers in their respective domains: France on land and Britain at sea.

British and French Trade Restrictions

• Starting in 1806, Britain issued Orders in Council, closing European ports under French control to foreign shipping unless ships first stopped at a British port.
• Napoleon retaliated by ordering the seizure of all merchant ships that entered British ports, including American vessels.
• American ships were caught in a difficult position, unable to trade with either Britain or France without facing conflict from the other.

AHC Note — The Berlin Decree, issued by Napoleon in 1806, was a key part of his Continental System. This decree declared a comprehensive trade embargo against Britain and its allies, aiming to isolate Britain economically and weaken its global influence. It prohibited any neutral nation from trading with Britain, including the United States.

Napoleon issued the Milan Decree in 1807 and expanded trade restrictions against Britain. This decree declared that any neutral ship that had traded with Britain or submitted to British naval authority would be subject to seizure by French forces. The Milan Decree further strained relations between the United States and France, as American ships became targets in the escalating conflicts and trade restrictions.

The British Orders in Council were enacted from 1807 to 1812 and imposed blockades and restrictions on American trade with France. They allowed the Royal Navy to intercept American ships headed to French ports or continental Europe and seize their goods. The escalating Orders in Council disrupted U.S. trade and were a major factor in increasing tensions with Britain in the years before the War of 1812.

British Impressment and American Seamen

• Impressment involved the forcible enlistment of sailors and was a common practice used by the British for over four centuries.
• British press gangs used clubs and stretchers to capture sailors, including U.S. citizens.
• From 1808 to 1811, approximately 6,000 American citizens were impressed by the British.
• Many of these impressed sailors died or were killed while serving on British ships, causing significant distress among their families.

The Chesapeake-Leopard Affair

• In 1807, a British frigate, the Leopard, intercepted the U.S. frigate Chesapeake near Virginia’s coast.
• The British captain demanded the surrender of four alleged deserters from his ship.
• The American commander refused the demand and was unprepared for combat.
• The British ship fired three broadsides at close range, resulting in the deaths of three Americans and wounding eighteen others.
• The British took the four alleged deserters and severely damaged the Chesapeake, which returned to port in a damaged state.
• The British Foreign Office admitted that Britain was in the wrong regarding the incident.
• Despite this admission, the American public was furious and demanded action.
• Jefferson could have chosen to go to war but did not.

The Hated Embargo

Constraints on U.S. Response to Foreign Aggression

• National honor demanded a response to British and French mistreatment.
• A large-scale foreign war was against the established policy of the new Republic.
• The U.S. military was weak, partly due to Jefferson’s stance.
• A disastrous defeat would exacerbate America’s situation rather than improve it.

Jefferson’s Diplomatic Strategy: Economic Pressure

• European nations depended on the U.S. for raw materials and foodstuffs.
• Jefferson believed that cutting off American exports would compel the warring powers to respect U.S. rights.
• The strategy aimed to avoid war by leveraging economic dependence.

The Embargo Act of 1807

• The Embargo Act of 1807 prohibited the export of all goods from the U.S., regardless of the ship’s origin.
• It was intended as a middle ground between war and submission.
• The act was based on Jefferson’s concept of “peaceful coercion.”
• If successful, it aimed to uphold neutral rights and offer a new approach to foreign policy.
• Failure of the embargo could lead to America’s subjugation or involvement in the European conflict.

Economic Impact of the Embargo Act

• The embargo led to a severe downturn in the American economy.
• New England’s harbors were filled with idle ships, and docks were deserted.
• Soup kitchens emerged to support the unemployed.
• The embargo negatively impacted New England’s commerce more than it affected Britain and France.
• Southern and Western farmers faced significant losses due to unsellable cotton, grain, and tobacco.
• The embargo’s effects were perceived as harmful to American citizens rather than to foreign powers.

Rise of Illegal Trade and Public Discontent

• In 1808, illicit trade expanded, particularly along the Canadian border.
• Armed Americans on rafts often overpowered or intimidated federal agents.
• Public sentiment against the embargo led to the creation of derisive anagrams: “O Grab Me,” “Go Bar ’Em,” and “Mobrage.”
• The embargo was widely criticized and mocked, with the term “Dambargo” becoming popular.

Enforcement of the Embargo and Public Reactions

• Jefferson persuaded Congress to pass strict enforcement legislation for the embargo.
• The legislation was perceived as overly invasive and oppressive, prompting some Americans to recall George III in a more favorable light.
• A satirical poem from New Hampshire expressed public outrage, depicting the embargo as a destroyer of American commerce:

Impact of the Embargo on the Federalist Party and Secession Sentiments

• The embargo contributed to the revival of the Federalist Party.
• Federalists gained new support and used their opposition to the embargo to challenge the Jefferson administration.
• Federalist electoral votes increased from 14 in 1804 to 47 in 1808.
• New England displayed strong secessionist sentiments during the embargo period.
• Jefferson acknowledged feeling the foundations of government trembling under the pressure.

Repeal of the Embargo and the Non-Intercourse Act

• Congress repealed the embargo on March 1, 1809, just before Jefferson’s retirement.
• The Non-Intercourse Act was enacted as a substitute, reopening trade with all nations except Britain and France.
• Economic coercion remained the policy of the Jefferson administration from 1809 to 1812.
• The United States eventually entered the War of 1812.

Reasons for the Collapse of the Embargo

• Jefferson underestimated the British determination and overestimated their dependence on American trade.
• Britain experienced bumper grain crops, reducing their reliance on American exports.
• Latin American republics opened their ports for compensating commerce, providing alternatives to American trade.
• Napoleon controlled most of Europe and could afford to do without American trade.
• The French continued to seize American ships and cargo, claiming they were enforcing the embargo.

Critical Failures of the Embargo

• Jefferson miscalculated the unpopularity of the embargo.
• The embargo was not enforced long enough or tightly enough to achieve its goals.
• A leaky embargo, with widespread non-compliance, proved more costly than no embargo at all.

Federalist Opposition to the Embargo

• A Federalist circular in Massachusetts condemned the embargo.
• It called for Americans to reject the embargo, invoking the legacy of the Sons of Liberty.
• The circular depicted Jefferson as a despot threatening American independence.
• It urged citizens to act resolutely and with vengeance against the embargo.

New England’s Industrial Growth During the Embargo

• New England experienced renewed prosperity despite the embargo.
• With shipping restricted and imports scarce, New Englanders revived old factories and built new ones.
• The embargo inadvertently contributed to the growth of American industry.
• Jefferson, a critic of industrialization, may have unintentionally advanced American manufacturing more than Hamilton, its advocate.

Madison’s Gamble

Jefferson’s Presidential Successor

• Jefferson adhered to Washington’s precedent of serving two terms as President and then stepping down.
• He described the presidency as a “splendid misery.”
• Jefferson supported the nomination and election of James Madison as his successor for the Presidential Election of 1808.
• Madison was a close friend of Jefferson and shared his Virginian background and political views.

Madison’s Presidency and Challenges

• James Madison was inaugurated on March 4, 1809.
• At the time, Europe was engaged in a significant conflict.
• Madison was characterized as small in stature, light in weight, bald, and weak in voice.
• Despite his distinguished legislative career, Madison faced difficulties as president.
• He struggled with internal party factions and cabinet divisions.
• Madison often found himself responsible for challenging foreign policies he did not create.

Macon’s Bill No. 2 and the End of the Embargo

• The Non-Intercourse Act of 1809 was set to expire in 1810.
• Congress replaced the embargo with Macon’s Bill No. 2.
• Macon’s Bill No. 2 reopened American trade with all nations.
• The bill proposed that if Britain or France repealed its commercial restrictions, the U.S. would restore its embargo against the non-repealing nation.
• Madison viewed the bill as a capitulation and an admission of the U.S. dependence on one of the belligerents for trade.
• The bill left the decision of which nation would be favored up to Britain and France.

Napoleon’s Manipulation and Ambiguity

• Since 1806, Britain’s Orders in Council were justified as retaliation for Napoleon’s actions.
• Napoleon’s foreign minister hinted in August 1810 that French Decrees might be repealed if Britain lifted its Orders in Council.
• The message from Napoleon, known as the Cadore Letter, was deliberately ambiguous.
• Napoleon intended to prevent unrestricted trade between America and Britain.
• Napoleon hoped to maneuver the U.S. into resuming its embargo against Britain.
• The goal was to create a partial blockade against Britain without directly enforcing it.

Madison’s Gamble and Misjudgment

• Madison may have been aware of Napoleon’s deceit but hoped the threat of exclusive trade with France would compel Britain to repeal its restrictions.
• He accepted the French offer as evidence of a repeal.
• Macon’s Bill required Britain to revoke its Orders in Council and reopen the Atlantic to neutral trade within three months.

Failure of Madison’s Gamble

• Britain did not respond to Madison’s terms, maintaining control of the seas and seeing no need to bargain.
• Britain decided that America could trade exclusively with the British Empire or not at all while the war with Napoleon continued.
• Madison’s gamble failed, leading him to reestablish the embargo against Britain alone.
• This decision effectively ended American neutrality and was seen as a step toward war.

AHC Note — British impressment of American sailors and the trade war between Britain, France, and the United States were maritime issues that caused the War of 1812.

Tecumseh and the Prophet

Rise of the War Hawks

• The 12th Congress, meeting in late 1811, saw a shift in its composition.
• Many of the older members were replaced by young, aggressive representatives from the South and West.
• These new members, known as “War Hawks,” were eager for conflict with Britain.
• They were frustrated by British interference with American sailors and the British Orders in Council restricting American trade.
• The War Hawks resented being reminded of their fathers’ past victories and were particularly angered by the impact on American farm products.

AHC Note — The War Hawks included Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun.

Western War Hawks and Native American Threat

• Western War Hawks sought to eliminate the renewed threat from Native American Indians.
• They were motivated by the encroachment of pioneer settlers into the Trans-Allegheny wilderness.
• As settlers moved westward, Indian tribes were increasingly displaced.

Tecumseh and the Prophet

• Shawnee brothers Tecumseh and Tenskwatawa — “the Prophet” — sought to resist westward expansion.
• They aimed to unify tribes east of the Mississippi River into a confederacy.
• Their movement promoted traditional practices: abandoning textile clothing for buckskin and forsaking alcohol.
• Tecumseh advocated for collective decision-making on land cessions, rejecting the concept of individual land ownership by whites.

Tecumseh’s Philosophy and William Henry Harrison’s Assessment

• Tecumseh questioned the sale of land in a speech, comparing it to selling natural elements like air and sea.
• He argued that all natural resources were made by the Great Spirit for the use of all people.
• William Henry Harrison praised Tecumseh as an extraordinary leader with the potential to create an empire rivaling those of Mexico or Peru, had it not been for the proximity of the United States.

Battle of Tippecanoe

• In 1811, William Henry Harrison, governor of Indiana Territory, advanced on Tecumseh’s headquarters.
• Tecumseh was recruiting in the South at the time.
• The Prophet, Tecumseh’s brother, attacked Harrison’s army with a small force of Shawnees.
• The Shawnees were defeated, and their settlement was burned.

Aftermath of the Battle of Tippecanoe

• The Battle of Tippecanoe made William Henry Harrison a national hero.
• The Prophet was discredited by the defeat.
• Tecumseh allied with the British following the battle.
• Tecumseh fought for the British in the War of 1812 and was killed in 1813 at the Battle of the Thames.
• With Tecumseh’s death, the dream of an Indian confederacy ended.

Mr. Madison’s War

Madison’s Path to War

• By the spring of 1812, Madison believed war was inevitable.
• The British arming of hostile Indians influenced Madison’s decision.
• War hawks in Congress, like Representative Felix Grundy of Tennessee, pushed for war.
• Grundy’s brothers had been killed in Indian clashes; he advocated attacking Canada to eliminate the Indian threat.
• The chant “On to Canada” was popular among War Hawks.
• Southern expansionists eyed Florida, which was still under Spanish control.

Madison’s Decision to Go to War

• Madison aimed to restore confidence in the government.
• Democratic-Republicans had attempted to navigate between warring European powers for 5 years.
• Their efforts led to international scorn and internal strife.
• Madison and the Democratic-Republicans believed only a vigorous assertion of American rights could prove the viability of American nationhood and democracy.
• They thought failing to defend itself would discredit American republicanism.

Declaration of War in 1812

• Madison asked Congress to declare war on June 1, 1812.
• Congress declared war two weeks later.
• The vote in the House was 79 to 49; in the Senate, 19 to 13.
• Support for war came from the South, West, and some Republicans in populous middle states like Pennsylvania and Virginia.
• Federalists, particularly in New England, opposed the war.
• New England responded to the declaration with muffled bells, flags at half-mast, and public fasting.

Reasons for New England’s Opposition to the War

• Pro-British Federalists in New England sympathized with Britain.
• They resented the Democratic-Republicans’ support for Napoleon, whom they viewed negatively.
• Federalists opposed the acquisition of Canada.
• They believed acquiring Canada would add more agrarian states.
• The addition of agrarian states would increase the voting strength of Democratic-Republicans.

New England Federalists Reac to the War of 1812

• The outrage of New England Federalists led to talk of secession.
• They were determined to control the nation or see it fail.
• A Republican versifier expressed their attitude: “To rule the nation if they could, But see it damned if others should.”

The United States Enters the War of 1812

• The United States faced severe internal divisions.
• The nation was about to enter a conflict against Britain, the world’s most powerful empire.
• Despite reasonable doubts about the chance of victory, the Democratic-Republicans felt they had no other option by 1812.

Additional Resources for Triumphs and Travails of the Jeffersonian Republic

The notes on this page are based on the 16th edition of The American Pageant. We have expanded on the source material with additional details, corrections, and links to Encyclopedia Entries that explain topics in more detail. For more information, including terms and definitions, see the following:

• Advanced Placement United States History (APUSH) Units
• The Confederation and the Constitution (1776–1790)
• Launching the New Ship of State (1789–1800)
• The Triumphs and Travails of the Jeffersonian Republic (1800–1812)
• The Second War for Independence and the Upsurge of Nationalism (1812–1824)
• The Rise of Mass Democracy (1824–1840)
• Forging the National Economy (1790–1860)
• The Ferment of Reform and Culture (1790–1860)